Delivering Powerful Constructive Feedback
Many of us are terrible at giving feedback, myself included. I have found that being a little more systematic with feedback and taking the science of human intrinsic motivation, the Self-Determination Theory (SDT), into account in the process makes it easier. While it will not fix all things, it promises to make your feedback a little more powerful and thoughtful. It is appropriate for both positive and negative feedback and it will improve your culture even if you only use parts of it. The most important thing that using this structure does is to help you be more purposeful and introspective with your feedback. Your own leadership muscles will flex and grow each time you coach with this process.
The Hard Thing About Feedback
People are much more likely, to tell the truth in private but are frequently silent in public, or worse, they say something different in a public forum because they harbor anxieties and fear. This happens when they don’t trust the environment enough to be fully authentic and honest. Most people want to be authentic, they want to call out the truth, but they hold back and sometimes become apathetic. This is a failure of leadership. It is a failure to create an environment of authenticity and trust. It is easy to fix with a little courage and by folding in the purposeful use of the Self Determination Theory in the delivery of feedback.
One of the most important things we do in business is to provide feedback to those around us. It is a critical part of our work just about every day and is essential to developing authentic and functional relationships with our colleagues. It is an unfortunate truth that the stronger the feedback needs to be, the harder it is to give. Most of us, myself included, are terrible at it. I believe the worst kind of feedback is that which is given without care and without taking into consideration what would be best, not only for the provider, but also for the receiver and for the broader environment.
I am a big fan of the Self Determination Theory (SDT) for describing volition and intrinsic motivation and I thought it would be interesting to take a stab at using this incredible theory to construct a formula and a template for providing feedback. After all, the goal of providing feedback is to intrinsically motivate the person to modify their behavior. I’ve been testing these best practices, in the form of a procedure, for a few years and the results have been spectacular, so I thought I would share them.
The Best Practices
Step 1: Ask for Their Assessment. By asking for their own assessment of their performance, gives you a chance to check your facts and your own confirmation biases. It also opens up your own ability to share feedback, by establishing the environment as one of collaboration and safety. You are acknowledging they are in control. This supports what the SDT refers to as the autonomy of the person who you want to receive the feedback. Use language that makes sense to you. You must authentically care that the person is open to and ready for the feedback and you have to start from a position of humility by recognizing that you may not have all the facts. If it turns out that you made incorrect assumptions or bad data, you might want to schedule some time in the future to exchange it. This is particularly important to recognize if you are in a position of “power” in relation to the recipient. If they feel as though you are not authentic or that they are forced to receive your feedback, it may not work to achieve an intrinsically motivated result. Ask them to get back to you when they are prepared to take constructive feedback and be authentic about it as their leader. If you skip this step, do it purposefully, as it will have a negative impact on their intrinsic motivation to make changes in response to the feedback.
Here are some examples:
“How do you think you performed in that scenario?”
“Let me know if you are interested in assessing and working on improving “x” together when you might have some time.”
If you are working with people who are not open to feedback, you might have bigger or deeper issues to deal with. It would be foolish to think that those issues are theirs and not yours and I would encourage you to take a hard look at what is causing this resistance.
Step 2: Share observations as data points. By sharing them as observations, you are again creating a safe environment for an open conversation about the facts. You are also demonstrating you are open to modifying what you believe about the facts. This gives you both room to get clear and create a shared understanding of the facts surrounding the matter at hand. It also makes sure you are not getting personal. It is really important in this step not to use their name, or non-specific words which don’t have any objective foundation. Non-specific, subjective words and phrases cannot be acted on and the receiver may walk away not knowing what to do with the feedback. Again, the key here is to share only the facts as observations. As a leader, when you hear people complaining about other people, you need to stop them in their tracks and get to the heart of the matter: It is almost always behaviors that are driving the need for feedback. It is important to be as objective as possible about the behaviors, not the people.
Additionally, it is nearly impossible to deliver unbiased feedback. You are always jaded by your own biases, whether you like it or not. Feedback is rarely as objective as you think it is. It is best to acknowledge that you are providing your subjective feedback, subject to your own blind spots. The better job you do as a leader of understanding and addressing these biases, the better.
Here are a few guidelines to follow when sharing facts:
- Try to use “we” instead of “you.” When you use you, you are pointing a finger. Eliminate “you” language in your feedback. This can be difficult, but wherever possible, incorporate “we” into your statements. In most business cases, you are working with a team and the actions of the individual impact the greater “we” of the team. It is powerful and appropriate to switch to “we” language while retaining integrity. I wrote about the leadership flip here.
- Don’t be afraid to openly discuss “feelings.” If you are the one impacted, do not be afraid to express how their behavior made you feel or how you perceived they made others feel. If you sense that others are made to feel something, express that as an observation in the best way that you can.
- Phrase your data points as observations by using words and phrases like “I saw” or “I observed” or “It appears as though” or “My perception is that.” This will allow you to be safely wrong and adjust your perception in the event you are wrong. It will also establish credibility and earn trust by acknowledging you might be wrong and will help you to disarm the recipient by being openly vulnerable.
- Be specific. Refer to a precise moment or behavior which occurred. If you are operating off of hearsay, you need to encourage the observer to use this process themselves. The more specific you are the more actionable the feedback will be.
- Avoid the use of absolutes. When you use words like “never” and “always,” you make big assumptions, threaten the ability to adjust behaviors in the future, and put people on the defensive. You can never authentically observe that something is absolute, so just do not use these words.
- Discuss the behavior, not the person. You have to start by assuming everyone wants to achieve a positive result for everyone who is involved. Above all else, remember this great quote by St. Augustine, popularized Mahatma Gandhi: “Hate the sin, not the sinner.”
Here are a few specific examples:
Instead of: “You are creating a toxic environment for your peers by talking over meetings.”
Try something like this: “It is sometimes hard to notice when we are doing it, but I observed in yesterday’s 1 o’clock client meeting when our colleagues tried to share their ideas, we were not given the space to express ourselves and some valuable ideas may have been left out of the discussion.”
Instead of: “You undermined your team by providing an estimate to the client the team did not endorse.”
Try something like this: “It appeared as though the email we sent yesterday included an incomplete estimate which was not endorsed by the team and may not be accurate.”
Instead of: “You intentionally provided an estimate to the client you knew was incomplete.”
Try something like this: “I read your email to the client. It looked as though we led the client to believe it was complete when we knew it was not.”
By establishing a shared understanding of the facts, you ensure the second core component of the SDT is supported: Competence. Empathy and authentic listening are critical at this stage. You have to be open to reinterpreting the “data” and hearing the receiver’s description and interpretation of the events that transpired. Sharing and confirming the data around exactly what behaviors are occurring, as objectively as possible, ensures the receiver knows precisely what to change. We all want to grow and learn and well-formed feedback can serve to help everyone to grow and learn. It is an opportunity for discovery and reflection if delivered well.
Step 3: Transfer your understanding of the impact on others. Ensuring the recipient understands how the behavior impacted the other people in your ecosystem will support the SDT by improving relatedness. According to SDT, We all need to feel some sense of connection to the people we work with and we need to know the work we are doing is making the world a better place for someone else. By connecting the recipient to the impact of the behavior on others, you establish a decision-making framework that might lead to a better future for everyone involved.
Start by finding and articulating your shared goals, in this context. Gain agreement on what a better future would like for everyone involved. This also establishes the common ground upon which both the giver and receiver stand. Whatever you are trying to accomplish together, it is in relation to another group of people for whom you both authentically care (I hope.) Establishing common ground and purpose is essential for powerful feedback.
To expand on the examples above, try the following:
“Lets start with agreement that we all need to be working toward turning this client into an advocate. Do you agree?”
Once you have the goal agreed on, move into the impact in your authentic feedback.
“Our team has said they do not have the opportunity to communicate and their ideas are not being heard. The impact is profound. Our team is asking to leave this project and the drop in their productivity numbers might be partially explained by this.”
“Our team has expressed how they do not trust our to communications with the client without them present. This is inefficient. They are also concerned about how our customers will feel when they find out the estimate may have to change.”
“Our client might lose faith in all of us when they find out we intentionally provided a false estimate. It has the potential to degrade trust”
Empathy and authentic listening are critical at this stage as well. You have to be open to reinterpreting your perception about what impact has or will occur as a result of the behavior. You must come to an agreement about the impact that has or will occur as objectively as possible.
Step 4: Ask for a solution. Putting it all together in an autonomy-supportive way by recognizing their competence to produce a better future and connect to the more positive future that will result for all. In other words, use the SDT to deliver some probing, non-rhetorical questions to help the recipient derive and propose solutions on their own. It is important they come up with two things here. Coach them, by asking more probing questions, if they don’t:
- A clear understanding of what behavior would have resulted in a more positive result.
- An articulate understanding of what will or will not happen in the future to ensure the future is better for all going forward.
Ask questions in ways that recognize their autonomy. They will not modify their behavior unless they want to. If you tell them what to do, they might do it once, but if you get them to make it their own decision and get them to articulate the decision they made, you will earn a more sustainable result.
If the behaviors are negative, and you are unable to come up with a solution you will eventually have to escalate the issue. But if the receiver comes up with a good solution and their plan for the future will result in a positive collective future, everyone wins.
Try the following:
“What might we do to produce a better result together?”
“How might we….?”
“Have you seen any better way of doing this?”
Step 5: The big ask. I have found ending your feedback with the big ask is the most powerful way to close a section. What is the big ask:
“What can I do to help you be more successful?”
Come up with your own authentic version of this question. The point is to authentically express your intentions to see them find success and to work through any roadblocks and barriers with them. You want to create a team that serves each other and your shared customers. Remember it is everyone’s job to cause the “The Leadership Flip” from “I” thinking to “We” thinking for everyone involved.
The best innovations often come in the worst of team breakdowns.
In a breakdown, where authentic feedback is required to improve the environment, and the three components of SDT are being considered - innovation results. The people on the team feel safe to be open, authentic, and valued. They are committed to being objective with their observations and learning from each other. They have a shared, human-oriented purpose. These are the teams that come up with the most powerful breakthroughs.
Logistics
Feedback is always better delivered closer to the point in time the action occurred. While it is not always possible, it is most powerful “in the moment” and delivered through these questions. The longer you wait, the more distorted the facts become in all of our minds. In the Speed of Trust, by Stephen M.R. Covey, he supports these arguments eloquently by describing why it is important to move fast and to build “Smart Trust” based on analysis and competence around the facts.
Another problem is hearsay. If you have to deliver feedback based on the words of others, it is always less powerful. The best solution when you hear about problems in your organization is to coach the folks with the feedback, using this process, to deliver it themselves. Do your best to eliminate the possibility for Karpman’s drama triangle to take hold. Consider the proverbial advice:
Receiving Feedback
The science of Self-Determination Theory also applies to the receiver. If someone cares enough about you to give you feedback, it means that the person giving you feedback shares some common goal with you and cares enough to invest in your collective future. The imperative for the receiver, in the context of the Self-Determination Theory, is to make sure that the following occurs.
Relatedness and Purpose. Make sure that you share the same common goals and understand who you are serving together. With this common ground, you will both be more open and aligned on the goals.
Competence and Mastery. Be open to learning and growing. With a growth mindset, you have the opportunity to build a better, more confident relationship with the feedback provided in the pursuit of the shared goals.
Autonomy and Action. Set smart, clear goals together for a path forward and get after it in earnest. Firm commitments ensure that trust is earned and the relationship remains solid.
Most importantly, if you find yourself on the receiving end of some powerful feedback, understand that it is a gift. If you treat it as such, your collective futures will be brighter.
References and Further Reading:
The Self Determination Theory Handbook by Ed Deci and Richard Ryan
Why We Do What We Do by Ed Deci
The Speed of Trust by Stephen M. R. Covey
Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
Free Your Users by Sean Flaherty
The Leadership Flip by Sean Flaherty
A Game Free Life by Stephen Karpman
